Get this article on podcast (iPhone-ready, mp3) and support peacebuilding at the same time! The precarious peace between Sudan’s government-controlled north backed by Arab tribes and the semi-autonomous south controlled by rebel Black tribes overcame a major challenge yesterday when oil-rich lands between them were divided equitably according to each. 
The settlement, acclaimed by both sides and their supporters, is also another major victory for the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, Netherlands. Presiding arbitrator Pierre-Marie Dupuy and the parties involved deserve Nobel Peace Prize nomination. With billions of dollars, millions of lives, thousands of jobs, hundreds of negotiators and decades of civil war in the balance, two questions remain: Will it last? And is this a peacemaking and keeping model applicable elsewhere in Sudan and others hot spots around the world?
A year ago, the Abyei region and its villages were engulfed in a brutal battle between the Arab Misseriah tribe of the north and the southern Black Dinka tribe. The two tribes, with their governments backing, then sought peace through settling territorial claims (including coveted oil lands) at The Hague. Now provisionally secured, many Sudanese and outsiders are pushing for the same peacemaking model to be applied in the country's northwest region, Darfur.
That The Hague, originally intended as an inter-national court, is effectively being used for settling intra-national disputes is nothing short of astonishing. If only war crimes courts were likewise. What is still needed, however, is an extra-national arbitration system for intra-national disputes that takes a proactive rather than reactive approach. For now, the oil for peace strategy working in Sudan is a promising current event opening up new possibilities for the future.
